Bird flu samples show new mutation

[JCMach1]

Samples taken from two of the bird flu victims in Turkey have doctors concerned, as an analysis of the sample shows a change in one gene in one of the two samples tested. World Health Organisation (WHO) has said, however, that it is too early to tell whether this means the deadly strain of the virus has mutated into a form passable from human to human. The mutation, which allows the virus to bind to a human cell more easily than to a bird cell, is a shift in the direction of the virus being able to infect people more easily than it does now, reported AP.

“We assume this could be one small step in the virus' attempt to adapt to humans,” WHO virologist Mike Perdue said on Thursday. “But it's seen only in one isolated case and it's difficult to make sweeping conclusions. We just have to wait and see what the rest of the viruses (from Turkey) look like.”... http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/3785876.asp?gid=74

[DRoseDARs]

1. It's good that they spell out immediately this DOES NOT mean...

...it has mutated into a human-to-human strain. But a frightening change nonetheless.

[mike_c]

12. agreed, on both counts....

eom

[SpiralHawk]

2. Mutant Planet

In the era of the Skull & Boner Kabal & Krewe.

Kreepee.

[crispini]

3. uh oh.

[modrepub]

4. It can't be

We all know species can't evolve once created by God! <sarcasm>

[Mountainman]

5. No that can't be. It has to be an intelligent design change

How easily we accept the idea that a virus can mutate yet nothing else can evolve.

[Inland]

10. Not at all. The intelligent designer just hates birds.

Or has some sort of purpose in contagion. End of story, end of inquiry, time to die.

[NYC]

6. Well, that's not good.

Time will tell.

[SaveElmer]

7. This is not a new mutation...

This same mutation has been seen before in China and Vietnam in 2003. This was reported two days ago. One small mutation in one sample is meaningless with an organism that mutates all the time. This mutation did not cause increased spread two years ago and there is no reason that it will now.

[mike_c]

13. links please....

There is nothing in the OP article indicating what substitutions occurred, which coat proteins were affected, or how human cell membrane affinity was affected other than the general adjective "improved." Nor do I recall any discussion of similar changes being observed in SE Asia. Would you be kind enough to provide links documenting the assertion that this is not a new direction for the H5N1 avian flu? TIA.

[SaveElmer]

14. Link...

This story was on several sites...

"Scientists have seen mutation before
Perdue said the U.N. health agency is not alarmed by the finding in a single virus sample because this exact genetic change has been seen before, in samples from southern China in 2003, and it had no impact on the course of the disease, the behavior of the virus or the pattern of human infections."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10826006/

[mike_c]

15. thanks-- wish there was more information about...

...whether this is a particularly active locus or whether this represents a reasonably conserved change that is simply not very important, at least on its own.

[SaveElmer]

16. I'm not an expert...

But from what I read this was one mutation observed in one patient. The comments I read indicated were that this was not really surprising, and would be unlikely to cause rapid transmission in humans. I did read it made it more easy to attach in the nose and throat rather than deep in the lungs, which is easier for the virus to do in humans, but would likely be less severe.

[dbt]

8. This comes close on the heels of the 1918 Spanish Flu virus re-creation.

We are about to be culled.

[SaveElmer]

9. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other...

These are completely seprate viruses, incubating in completely seperate ways. The fact that a virus has shown a mutation is not only not surprising, it is expected.

[dbt]

11. Sleep well. Sweet dreams. n/t